Skip to main content

About your Search

20121202
20121210
STATION
CSPAN 19
LANGUAGE
English 19
Search Results 0 to 18 of about 19
on the bill they just debated, changing federal energy efficiency laws. we'll take you live next to the capital, the chair and co-chair of the democratic caucus, just starting a briefing talking about the fiscal cliff and jobs. it's live here on c-span. >> and continues to preach the kind of message that i think the nation needs, one of compromise but one of assurity that we are going to be looking out tore the interest of the middle class and the protection of social security, medicare and medicaid for the people who are in such desperate need of those great programs that are the hallmark of our country. we have repeatedly said and our caucus again just confirmed that job creation equals deficit reduction, and we must put the country back to work. we have proposals that are on the floor. we still believe that even with the -- what little time remains and what little time remains when we're actually working, this is still possible. this is still doable. this is not a democrat or republican issue. republicans believe that america needs to go back to work. it's just a matter of hav
in undergraduate hours, law school, or high school. i have learned more about history, government, the true history of this country. not what we have been spoonfed in high school. or in critical about the pleasant stories where we were happy with smiles on their face. where we have come from and how far we have come and how far we can go in terms of really being that bright and shining lfght for other countries to follow by example. host: is that it? caller: please, please, is there some way we can make texas c- span? they will not go on tv for people who are on satellite. we are bleeding republicans in this state with these voting machines. texas used to be such a good state to be from. host: what do you mean, make texas c-span? caller: i would like to see a c- span texas. i bet there are a lot of people and a lot of states that would like to see that. host: your earlier comments, can we use those for a commercial? thank you for calling in this morning. here is more facebook comments on our question this morning. keenan says -- john says -- sal says -- and ruben says -- don from book raton, hi, do
the gramm-rudman deficit law, which was so important at the time. those issues remain important today. he did not aspire to be a politician, and he did not have to like one. he cared deeply. [laughter] we know he cared deeply about our country and devoted himself because he had a calling to shape and preserve our country's future. he believed deeply in the rule of law and used the force of his intellect to defend it. one of the things that is most telling about warren rudman is the statement that represents what he was all about. he once said -- i consider myself an american first and a republican second. fiercely independent, and totally committed to the common good, he had the courage of his convictions and stood for what he believed in. in bidding farewell to the senate in 1992, he expressed gratitude for the opportunity to serve in the senate with talented colleagues. many are here today to speak about their experiences with him. he also expressed his hope for the future of the senate, saying it is a very special place with very special people. i hope in the coming years that the inst
people, voter i.d. laws a disproportionately affect us. if white people can go through all the laws, what are you telling back people? they are less than? that is what bothers me about rhetoric. we always have to make special --there has to be a specialist when we deal with minorities. it there too feeble mind it appeared we need to make concessions. they cannot follow the rules. we treat people like victims, i do not think they want to aspire. >> defense secretary leon panetta visited the walter reed medical center tuesday to celebrate the hospital's first anniversary. it was created out of the merger of the walter reed army medical center and the bethesda naval hospital. this is about 40 minutes. >> it is my true pleasure to welcome me here this morning. over a year ago to host a dedication ceremony for what was then the new walter reed medical center. you are words that many of us that day. he pointed out if his the people that can make the biggest difference. -- he pointed out that it is the people that can make the biggest difference. i would be happy to report to you that we stand b
to take these young women when they are interacting with law enforcement because a lot of them find themselves into prostitution and get treated like perpetrators as opposed to victims. this is the psychology of a perpetrator but they are victims and we have to get law enforcement and our judicial system to treat these women as victims and put them in a setting to pull themselves away from drug addition. >> in a minute, politico is -- politico is going to ask you some questions. one of the questions that has come in, who is the best leader in washington, d.c.? >> robert griffin, iii. >> why did the majority of americans reject the republican party in the recent election? >> it was an election and it was a very close election. if you look at the nims and the differences between the two. i think the republican party can do a better job of limited government and freep enterprise movement and connect those policies. >> why has there been a failure to connect? >> i'm not sure there is one reason for it and i haven't had time to think about it why it has happened but it needs to happen. t
said in a law that they would pay that money back in a trust fund. but there is suspicion on whether that is rarely ever going to happen. that feeds into their concern about what will happen to social security. is it going to be changed in ways that affect the benefits? host: all of the calls to simplify the tax code, to streamline it, and that may certainly mean to itemize the credits of that take place on the tax returns. guest: the complexity of the tax system is a huge problem. everyone from the irs on down to congress and the industry out there, if you will, the financial accounting industry, everyone recognizes is an enormous problem and causes people to pay a lot more than they otherwise would. most people do not do their own taxes anymore because they are so complex. they rely on software that is kind of a black box. it is hard to know how the tax system works anymore. people do not have as much of an incentive to take a deduction if they do not know it is there. and the software is what they are depending on. host: does simplifying the tax code as necessarily mean lessening
for energy information. we are by law -- it is supposed to be unbiased and neutral in our development of energy analysis, using the debt that we collect -- data that we collect. the annual energy outlook reference case, which were published today, is not really a forecast as it is a baseline. it is built on the idea of existing law and regulation so that the public and policymakers can compare what new laws and regulations or changes in world events might mean to our baseline. host: frank verrastro doggett is vice president of the energy program at the nonprofit center for strategic and international studies. who uses these eia projections? guest: the data sets the reference cases. they're not really pinpoints, because nobody gets 24 the right. but the trends are really important -- 2040 right. but the trends are really important. agencies around the world, universities, financial analysts on wall street, everyone uses these kinds of reports to look at what the forecast on this change in energy landscape looks like. host: we are taking your calls and questions for both mr. for siemins
different laws than we do. if there say technology drain, it's also in terms of the u.s. laws we only prohibit certain type of technology that has to do with national security and technology. but when you talk in steve's case the talent of the invite tive things that get sucked out along with that, that's nobody really talks about that so i'd like to hear from you. >> it's true. what you are saying is true. it goes back to what i was saying the other countries are being a magnet for talent, there is no question about this so we have to recognize that is happening and make sure we're competitive. my own view is if people want to come here and get an education and go back to their country, fine, that is a way to build stronger committees in other parts of the world. that is part of our stated policy. having people come here if they want to go back and start companies there, that's fine. but we should at least give them the option of staying here. if they want to go back fine, but don't force them. encourage them to stay because we need smart people here working on these new technologies
. that is what law says must happen unless we reform it. i think that is a terrible way to run a public pension program. it should have reforms. the last such reforms that have been suggested, i would be happy with any of them. there is a set of leaders and social security that is not complicated that can be done and should be done. that would be the best thing for social security. host: thank you for being on c- span. palm beach, fla., in the and the blind -- -- on the independent line -- caller: as an independent, i am starting to form an opinion that if president obama wants to go over the fiscal cliff, it appears that way, because he has had no credible counteroffer. he says i will give you cuts in the future but he is not specific. his speeches are always peppered with we have to invest. he does not mean in the private sector. he wants more the firefighters, teachers, policemen. this adds to the public debt. we are borrowing, from what i read yesterday, 46 cents on every dollar. that appears to me to be untenable. i am no fan of john boehner but he makes an offer that got him in touch with
said. the supreme court is the law of the land. >> when i hear these accusations that black people voter i.d. loss disproportionately affect minorities -- implies to me that somehow we have something missing in our brain. as -- if white americans can get id to vote and go through all the processes to follow the laws, what are you telling black people? that somehow they are not good enough? that is what bothers me about a lot of the rhetoric coming from democrats and the left. we always have to make -- there has to be a special mass when we deal with minorities because they are too feeble minded. we really need to make concessions for them because they cannot follow the rules like everybody else. when you treat people like victims, i do not think they want to ask bair. wright, ith crystal righ sunday night at 8:00 on c-span's "q&a." >> they both -- politicians from both sides said they would be able to avoid the fiscal cliff. this included chris van hollen. also, senators mark warner and bob corker, a republican from tennessee. this is one hour. >> good morning. i'm the head of bloo
in law that would help us avoid the kind of obstruction and the kind of showdowns we have had in the past over the debt ceiling. in fact, the idea was not new. it was his original idea that has been the law of the land that followed. and he offered and challenged senator reid to bring this matter for consideration by the senate. he said he would bring this to a vote in 20 minutes. and we would decide up or down whether the debt ceiling problem would be resolved once and for all under senator mcconnell proposal. and then senator mcconnell objected, say, no, no, we need 60 votes. for those who do not follow the senate, 60 votes is equivalent to a filibuster vote. so this may be a moment in senate history when a senator made a proposal, and when given a opportunity for a vote, he filibustered his own proposal. i think we have reached a new spot in the history of the senate we have never seen before. i will ask a parliamentarian to really look into this. i don't think this has ever happened before. but this calls into question if this was a kind of offer that would consider to be good faith.
different laws than we do. my question is if there is a technology drain, in terms of the u.s. laws, we only prohibit certain types of technology that has to do with national security and technology, but when you talk about in steve's case, it innovative things that are basically getting sucked out all along with that, nobody really talks about that. so i would like to hear from you. >> it is true. exactly what you are saying is true. other countries are stepping up their efforts to be a magnet for talent. some of it is professors, some of it is researchers, and there is no doubt. we just have to make sure we are aware of that. people want to come here and get an education and want to go back to their country, fine. it is a way to build centers of innovation and entrepreneurship in other parts of the world. that is actually part of our state department stated policy. having people come here, if they want to go back and start companies there, that is fine. but we should at least give them the option of staying year. if they want to go back, fine. but do not make them go back. people staying y
they say, well, our property, our cars, our technology wears out faster. guest: the current law is not correct. and this has to do with the retailers and the restaurants. their provision is that they get to deduct their property over 15 years instead of over 39 years. and they say, you know, 39 years is unrealistic and 15 years is more on money. host: how long you have been writing about taxes? guest: i've been write being taxes for maybe five years. host: how much do you think you know about the u.s. tax code? guest: not so much. i mean, like, i talk to tax experts, people with law degrees. and they probably know a lot about one part of the tax code. so, there are only like a few people i know who just have an encyclopedic knowledge about the entire thing who could say, in section 140-c-34 -- so those are very few and far between. i know more than many people. host: if somebody sat you down and said, write a book about the u.s. tax code -- guest: i could probably write about it in a more entertaining way. that's why i'm here to sort of bridge the gap between the tax nerds who k
on sharia law. it is by its very nature anti-west, anti-democratic, anti-liberal and anti-peace. it's interests are opposite to ours. this is islamism, it is the opposite of democracy. democracy -- people are the source of legitimacy. periodic elections to choose one's representatives. the idea that the political minority can eventually become the majority. respect for certain rights. protection for the rights of religious and ethnic minorities. protection that goes beyond tolerance and of course the rule of law, the respect for a judiciary that is independent. today's debate is simple. we aren't asking whether they can be good muslims and good democrats, the answer to that is yes. but can islammists be democrat. can advocates of the ideology of fundamentalism lead their countries to democracy? the answer is an obvious no. our answer is grounded inexperience and fact. their answer is grounded in hope and assertion. we have experiences, iran, gaza, sudan, lebanon, turkey, in none of these countries have the attributes of democracy occurred when islammists were in power. rights are re
will hear. it gives a little bit of the text put into place when it was signed into law. this is part of section 7. and determining the ruling regulation of the bureau and agencies of the united states, the word marriage means only a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife, and the words bouse refers only to a person of the opposite sex who is a husband or wife. one of looking at a state militia and the other looking at a federal issue, two cases, and a decision expected by june. if you want to wait and, the numbers are on your screen. -- if you want to weigh in, the numbers are on your screen. tweets.also send us tweak this is from "the washington post." the phone lines will remain on your screen. out of georgia on the democrat line. good morning. >> thank you it. i would like to say, i do not believe the in gay marriage. but i believe everyone should have the right to practice their religion and love how the 12. these right-wingers -- there are a lot of democrats that did not believe in gay marriage, but we do not believe we should be able to stop anyone from m
. then it sprang back to life as part of the extension of the bush tax cuts that president obama signed into law. you have a debate -- very few members dispute that it needs to be continued. the debate is over whether you continue it at the current level. there is an exemption level, $10 million for a couple. or at the white house would prefer a 45% rate. that is the debate right now. there's a split among democrats. the white house wants a less generous estate tax. red-leaning states like max baucus. host: that was the headline recently in "the wall street journal," showing the senators. at its highest, what was the estate tax? how many people did the estate tax affect? guest: we are talking tens of thousands. right now it affects 3000 estates. the exemption level is set high historical novel. it has come down significantly. big argument from conservatives is it hits small businesses and farms. the number a hits is a small fraction. host: if nothing happens, what happens to the estate tax? guest: then it goes back to the levels of an exemption of $1 million. host: and that could hit about 55,00
extended all of those changes in 2010. that's the law of the land still today. tax policy has been exactly the same over this continuum. what has changed, mr. speaker, what has changed is the spending. the reason deficits have grown not one, not two, not three but almost four times larger than the previous record deficit in american history is not because tax policy has changed, it hasn't. it's because federal spending policy has changed. and that's what we have to get our arms around here in this body. what i show going forward, mr. speaker, put a little square around the annual budget deficits that have been run during the first four years of the obama administration, but i also project what the congressional budget office believes, that's a nonpartisan budget planning group we have here on capitol hill, what they believe is in store for us in the future if we continue under current policy. -h tsh-that's trillion dollar deficits going out for years to come. the problem is not tax policy, mr. speaker, the problem is spending policy. can we improve tax policy? you better believe it. mr. sp
.d. laws disproportionately affecting minorities, it applies to me that somehow we have something missing in our brain. white americans can and get i.d.'d to vote and can follow the laws, so what are you telling what people? they're not good enough? this is what bothers me about a lot of rhetoric coming from democrats and the left. we always have to make a specialness when we deal with minorities because they are too feeble minded. we have to make concessions because they cannot follow the rules. when you treat people like it does, i do not think they want to inspire. >> the editor of conservative black chick.com, crystal wright. >> editors say hurricane a sandy caused $5 billion to four infrastructure -- -- poor infrastructure damage in their state. >> good morning. i welcome everyone to today's hearing which have called to address the devastating impact that super-storm sandy had a run -- had on our regional transportation, the most widely new transportation network and unprecedented damage to our system and estimates of the damage have reached more than an $7 billion. across the regent
for businesses, and it would drag down our entire economy. now, congress can avoid all this by passing a law that prevents a tax hike on the first $250,000 of everybody's income. that means 98% of americans and 97% of small businesses wouldn't see their income taxes go up by a single dime. even the wealthiest americans would get a tax cut on the first $250,000 of their income. and families everywhere would enjoy some peace of mind. the senate has already done their part. now we're just waiting for republicans in the house to do the same thing. but so far, they've put forward an unbalanced plan that actually lowers rates for the wealthiest americans. if we want to protect the middle class, then the math just doesn't work. we can and should do more than just extend middle class tax cuts. i stand ready to work with republicans on a plan that spurs economic growth, creates jobs and reduces our deficit -- a plan that gives both sides some of what they want. i'm willing to find ways to bring down the cost of health care without hurting seniors and other americans who depend on it. and i'm willing
Search Results 0 to 18 of about 19